The notion that Libertarians were "completely against" black people having the same rights as whites is a lie. Next, you overcomplicate Libertarianism. It's not complicated. We want to live our lives and you to live your life and for govt to get involved only to settle legal disputes or when that nation is invaded. Libs and Cons both like using govt to effect social change, which we reject. It's funny to us when a Lib fails to realize how like a Con he is in that regard.
this insane babble rant , is just searing indictment of our education in the US.where all this kid is doing is putting fragmented bits of regurgitated socialists obambaphile propaganda.he offers no proof , tries to plagiarize and then pass it off as original though in a effort to "look educated" now throw in the narcissism of a closed mind & BOOM. we have this vid here.1 last thing kid .stay off the dope. take a page from your idiot " YES WE CAN"
this insane babble rant , is just searing indictment of our education in the US.where all this kid is doing is putting fragmented bits of regurgitated socialists obambaphile propaganda.he offers no proof , tries to plagiarize and then pass it off as original though in a effort to "look educated" now throw in the narcissism of a closed mind & BOOM. we have this vid here.1 last thing kid .stay off the dope. take a page from your idiot " YES WE CAN"
@SpartacusForFreedom dude...just stop lol you are making yourself look plain ridiculous. You just keep mouthing off in anger by taking it out on ppl who are actually educated. By the way, you cannot play the "education is taken over by liberals" card when since the 80s, there has been considerable influence by right wing think tanks, especially the Cato Institute
you were well actually you were doing less thinking...you were being more impulsive and just ranting rather than actually trying to figure out a soluble solution
3) because then you need to provide a standard on what incentives businesses have to regulate themselves and "do the right thing"; frankly, history shows they can be incapable of that, and unfortunately libertarians give more agency to "wishful thinking" of the abstract, rather than to interdisciplinary scholarship like history. It looks good on paper, but it really does not hold much weight to the practicalities of our time. Ppl are ppl, whether in gov't or in business, need to be accountable
@Radetzky19 4) actually, that standard I mentioned before that you need to provide, actually is a double standard and it is logically fallacious. You cannot demonize the government yet give businesses carte blanche because they are "moral".
2) Secondly, from what you said :"That is the cost of allowing them to regulate themselves". LOL REALLY?If it was not for government, child labor would have still been used for awhile, racial and disability discrimination would still be allowed for employers,etc.There needs to be a separate body that id not tied to the market to make sure these entities can be held accountable. You cannot use the single-villain concept by demonizing the government but yet hold the market to be divine, know why?
It's really funny and naive of libertarians to use the "single-villain" concept in which government is to blame for everything and it is inherently evil but yet businesses are all good and divine... -_-. Businesses can be just as corrupt (and I argue even more so) when you decide to give them the power because all that matters is profit; so businesses are perfectly fine with violating human rights and committing abuses...this is the world libertarians want to live in and it's quite scary
@Radetzky19 Haven't you ever heard Ron Paul talk about the negatives of corporatism? Please don't comment on stuff when you don't even know what you are talking about.
@2411Hellokitty I do know what I am talking about...first of all, if Ron Paul is advocating for a free market society, then he should not be looking to conduct regulation on corporations; he saying that he will is not only contradictory to libertarian theory but it is also a politically bankrupt statement. Paulbots for some reason think Paul is immune from corruption. Sorry, he can be bought out by the private sector like everyone else.
@Radetzky19 He is talking about the government being in bed with corporations. They need to be separate. Our government is accepting money and the corporations are given favors in return. Our tax dollars are used to bail out these failed companies.
@Radetzky19 LOL, you didn't even look into the topic. You just posted a comment based on what you heard. You have no idea what you are talking about. When does he talk about regulating corporations? He doesn't, he talks about keeping the government out of it. The government is the reason for all the corruption. They bailed out these companies with our money. They pretend to regulate things when they really don't. They need to let the market work.
@2411Hellokitty No I do sir, have you read robert nozick's book? You know..the father of american libertarianism? Most likely you have not. "The government is the reason for all the corruption". Again, your "argument" is fallacious because there is evidence that although the government failed to take some steps to derail the crisis, corporations and financial institutions were the primary reason it happened...and you want to deregulate even more? lmao.
@2411Hellokitty 2) government has been increasingly staying out of business since the 80s; just look into the history of deregulation...that is the reason the financial crisis happened, because businesses/corps/financial institutions are not being held accountable because all that matters to them is profit; there is no incentive for them to to conduct abuses. A world you paulbots want to live in would deregulate them more...to which I say GTFO.
@Radetzky19 The problem is that we don't allow them to fail. If they can't operate a business well enough to stay in business then they should be allowed to fail. That is the cost of allowing them to regulate themselves. The government needs to stop getting involved, stop doing favors for them, and most of all stop bailing them out.
@2411Hellokitty "The problem is that we don't allow them to fail". The real problem is that they are too big to fail, if we let them fail, the crisis would have been so much worse! Why are they too big to fail? DEREGULATION. The deregulation on businesses/financial institutions and the deregulation of campaign finance statutes that now allow any big business to buy out Congress...all because of your silly ideology that deregulation brings only prosperity.
@Radetzky19 The reason they got too big to fail is most likely bc they figured our government will bail them out. We have certainly set the standard now.
@2411Hellokitty "The reason they got too big to fail is most likely bc they figured government will bail them out". Which goes to show you that the private sector cannot be fit to regulate themselves exclusively. The government did their job to bail them out to prevent Americans from even worse suffering.
@Radetzky19 Ron Paul predicted that the housing collapse would come 5 years before it even happened. The government distorted the housing market with their policies. You can't argue against that.
@2411Hellokitty the FBI predicted it in 2004. Again, over the years, there have been ppl in government who saw it coming and tried to stop it by proposing regulations but of course this only sent the private sector into a hissyfit. There are some bad ppl in government but that does not make government as a whole bad.
@Radetzky19 Oh yeah Matt Damon huh. Looks like a bunch of rich people trying to tell me about a catastrophe coming and they may not be able to afford their next payment on their yacht. That catastrophe has already hit the rest of us and it is going to get worse. All thanks to our crappy government policies that destroys business and distorts the market.
@2411Hellokitty lol that documentary was made in 2009 in response to the economic crisis and he does some really great interviewing calling people out. Your first sentence is pathetic. OK, when I say preventing a worse catastrophe, that was back in 2008!! There is nothing to argue dude, if the government did not bail out these entities we would have suffered alot more, get over it and move on. Again, the use of the single-villain concept is fallacious
@Radetzky19 I never said that businesses weren't corrupt. So not sure where you came up with this "single-villain concept". Like I said money and power lead to greed. The federal government is just as susceptible to the greed as anyone else. The only difference is that the government has the power to take money from me, lock me up, take away liberties. I don't want them taking my money and getting involved in business b/c then they will become just as corrupt.
@2411Hellokitty businesses can take away your liberties too and they have in the past. It is not about who is corrupt rather how to old various entities accountable
@Radetzky19 When will Americans get it? To put it simple I feel that to be afraid of a corporation or business is one thing but to be afraid of my own government is a whole other ball game that I don't want to ever experience. Our government has no business doing what they are doing.
@2411Hellokitty im halting the conversation at this point because your points are becoming to generalized and you are relying on metaphysics for your reasoning. Especially that last sentence; government has no business doing what? sorry, but that requires so much more dissection
@Radetzky19 So you ran out of talking points to spew at me. I only have limited room to post a comment. Do you really need me to explain to you what our government is doing right now? Um, I thought that was the topic we were discussing. You know things like bail outs.
@2411Hellokitty whatever dude, you just keep going in circles, it's a waste of my time; I cant deal with cognitive dissonance..yes I'm aware of the problems, I'm just not crazy and I actually use rationality and practicality, not simple ideology
@2411Hellokitty businesses are allowed to fail and we have seen it with companies like enron, the problem is this was a very special case...again, I do not understand why you cannot see that bailing out prevented an even bigger catastrophe...you are def overthinking.
@2411Hellokitty I'm sorry but you cannot demonize the government from preventing a more catastrophic crisis. To do so, you have to really support that with overwhelming evidence because otherwise there is no credibility in it. I dont think you would be willing to suffer more.. I dont think anyone would..so that "argument" you have is pretty difficult to follow through
@2411Hellokitty sure but that doesnt mean you have to overthrow government. You also given the circumstances, must demonize the private sectors who took it upon themselves to be responsible for the crisis.
I am going to ask this question for starts to better understand this video so I am sure we are on the same page. What is the difference to you between a Libertarian and a Liberal? I really would not get the video if I dont hear your basis for this. Others wise I am going to have to assume what I think you mean and I do not want to be wrong on this.
Libertarians believe in the Constitution. The Constitution of the United States is not ridiculous. But don't fret Libertarians b/c these videos are a good sign. People don't post these types of videos about a party that doesn't matter. Ron Paul 2012!!!!
There are so many comments in your video that are absent of any genuine thought or logic, it would take me far more space than is available here to refute and ridicule them; so let me just say the following which will satisfy as a be all end all response to your inanity: Human nature has not changed since the constitution was written, the environment in which it is implemented has. Hence the general guideline and theory planted by the founders apply today same as in the 1700'sYou whiney libtard.
Libertarianism is not about anecdontes or "gotcha" quotes, but this video and the article it refers to IS.
The more freedom to choose a society has in any particulr industry - the more prosperous is.
We don't read every day about a crisis in supermarkets, Walmart shops, cafes, pharmacies etc. These are industries that are RELATIVELY up to the free market.
Compare that to the housing market, the banks, FEMA etc - these are heavily regulated and controlled industries, that regularly break down.
In the end, yes, it was pretty sporadic. Also you addressed some issues with, what I honestly think is, pretty abhorrent ignorance. A lot of what you said was twisting words or changing themes and relating or correlating non-related entities.
Also, you wanna know why the GOP is endorsing libertarianism more? Because if they pandor to our lust for promises then we will support them. They want that 10% "independent" vote.
if my history is correct, lincoln was a republican. and like milton friedman said, there would have been no laws governing blacks in the US if it was libertarian.
1. they want to extort money from the people (taxes)
2. they want to regulate the economy so corporations can ravage the world, regulation doesn't control big business, it prevents competition to big business, a free market is small/midsized businesses no corporation can exist in a free market
3. they want to keep a monopoly on services, that could be provided better by private enterprise
First, liberals are not good at arguing. Second, libertarians have well formed arguments because they are right. This guy does not know what he is talking about at all. How can you say that a libertarian "utopia" will not work if it hasn't been implemented?
@SuperWaterboy17 libertarianism is factless, abstract, theoretical theory that does not fit the present-day circumstances and practicalities and is thus unworkable. Like for historians, it is fallacious to start a works with the idea "this is what I think" and then pick and choose facts (fact-fillers) arbitrarily to fit your theory.
@Radetzky19 how can you say that libertarianism is fact-less when every argument that libertarians make is based off historical references that are fact. I would assume that your ideal society leans toward, socialism, maybe even communism, which has been PROVEN to fail. A free market society has never failed because a truly free market has never existed. What right do you have to take from one and give to another without both parties consent?
@SuperWaterboy17 "A free market society has never failed because a truly free market has never existed". You are falsely assuming that since it has not been tried, it must work. No sir, American libertarianism gives primary agency to the abstract, not history. I'm not even going to answer your last question because libertarians themselves coerce the masses to believe like them because that is the only way they can attain the system they want....talk about a contradiction
@Radetzky19 I didn't say, "because it has been tried, it is going to work." I said, "A free market society has never failed because a truly free market has never existed." I neither assumed that it would or would not work. I simply was stating the fact that you cannot say something doesn't work if it has been tried. That statement applies to many other aspects of life other than a free market society. Do I believe it will work? Yes I do. Does that mean that it will? No.
@SuperWaterboy17 Just like every other human being that tries to persuade another that what they believe is right, libertarians persuade non-libertarians that their belief is right. Tell me, what is the difference between a libertarian trying to persuade some to believe what they believe and you trying to persuade people that libertarians are wrong. UUUHHHHH Talk about a contradiction.
@SuperWaterboy17 because libertarian advocates complete liberty and non-coercion but you ironically coerce ppl to believe like you do;ppl have to succumb to your values...that's the difference. Libertarianism in and of itself is a contradiction...self-ownership as you see it is not self-evident thus not innate. Try using less metaphysical underpinnings for your theory.
@Radetzky19 No sir, it is not a contradiction. You clearly don't know libertarianism as well as you think you do. Believing in libertarianism is to believe in individual freedom for all. To believe that people should not infringe on other peoples individual freedoms. Therefor anything less than a libertarian society is not a truly free society. You are arguing that being under a libertarian society forces people to believe only libertarianism, which it does not.
@SuperWaterboy17 People can still believe in socialism under a libertarian society but instituting socialism infringes on personal liberty so therefor it cannot be implemented into a society. Which leads me back to my question, What right do you have to take from one and give to another without both parties consent?
@SuperWaterboy17 Yes it does, if people do not want to conform to your political ideology you are still coercing them and violating their liberties to live in a system they want to live in.
@Radetzky19 First, no one is forcing them to stay in the society, seems like a cop out but it is still a valid point. Second, you point you are making is essential that which would defend a murderer. i.e. a murderer had the freedom to kill someone and it infringes on his personal liberty to deny him that freedom. That is essentially what you are trying to say when you say that someone who believes in socialism has the right to take what doesn't belong to them.
@SuperWaterboy17 With your logic I can say this, first no one is forcing YOU to stay in the present society of the U.S., so why coerce everyone to conform to libertarian ideals?
the second point you made is just funny and horribly wrong, I'm def not debating with someone who knows logic.
Last time i checked libertarians believed in natural market evolution by means of consumer selection. We're not the ones who believe in an all powerful all loving government that controls everything.
you know nothing, do some freaking research. liberals believe in regulating everything cause people are stupid and can't do things themselves, and killing helpless feti. shut the heck up and get off youtube. p.s please get educated
This is all irrelevant though because any real libertarian will tell you that taxes of all kinds should be eliminated because it is thievery and so no, we do not want the state to have it.
marcus, I am a libertarian and have been to over 45 countries. My travels have confirmed, not denied, my beliefs about the evils of government. I guess I could be a single case, but most libertarians I know are quite well traveled, at least as much as the next guy. As far as a flat tax goes, the rich still pay more because a percentage is a percentage so if you make 30 grand or 300 grand, the guy making 300 grand will pay more than the 30 grand guy.
America is a socialist nation. We have a federal income tax, which means the government owns your money and provides the conditions (exemptions) upon which you can keep some of it. Another point you're missing is that the founders were Libertarian, and for good reason. Someone explain to me how a small group of people can decide whats best for a nation, economically and socially. Go ahead and try. It doesn't make sense. Thats why the people should restrain the gvt, not the other way around.
The difference between Libertarianism and socialism is this- Libertarians believe that rights are granted to each individual from a source that transcends government or a collective group, so long as no individual suppresses the rights of another, Socialists believe rights are granted to individuals through a collective majority (government.) The first tenet of socialism is the denial of private property, which means you can't own anything, even yourself. So what if the government is corrupt?
There is something that you don't get. We don't like you or your government. Libertarians just want to be left alone. We hate politics. We hate government. We hate our money and property being stolen. We want you and your government and your programs to get out of our lives.
Please go read the Constitution to find out about real Libertarianism, since you apparently haven't a clue. Sorry. Didn''t make it through much of your incoherent diatribe. You have a gross misunderstanding of Libertarianism.
You say, "It's hard to read Libertarians without concluding that they've never been out of the country or even their tiny little suburb."
Erm, excuse me!? I was a military brat for the first 17 years of my life! I've lived in and/or visited 18 different countries on 3 different continents and 39 of the 50 states! And I'm Libertarian! I'm sure that others have visited or lived elsewhere, too. So, um, I'm sorry, Marcus, but you sound profoundly parochial in this video.
Furthermore, having been a military brat, I have firsthand experience with socialized medicine. It's all that we had in the military. Think about that for a moment. But my experience with socialized medicine goes beyond the military, because when we lived in England, my mum's home country, we used the British National Health System.
One common statement aptly summarizes the military and socialized medicine: "Hurry up... and wait!" Because that's exactly what you'll be doing. A lot of waiting.
You ask the question how will everything be paid for without an income tax? Before you ask such a question, you should research the answer to this question, "How did the U.S. pay for everything during the first 137 years of its history, when it had NO income tax?" Resorting to arguments that the times were different, the society was more agrarian, etc, ignores the fact that the truisms of sound economics remain constant regardless of the technological level of any epoch or country.
Were good at arguing because we are smart and have formed our opinions by becoming informed, however just keep making excuses and making false generalizations.
"I read points i found off bias internet websites after lots of searching for negative opinions. Then i go make vidoes on other peoples points like a parrot and try to "discuss" the issues in nothing but platitudes.. "
You will never understand the real issues until you learn to think for yourself. Surrounding yourself with other equally ignorant people who share your views does not mean you are right.
The Bill of Rights only applied to what Congress could do to the people, read Marbury v. Madison. And you bring up the FairTax. The FairTax applies to only new goods and services that are purchased, now tell me, who is more likely to purchase new goods and services? Libertarianism, especially in economics, is based around the idea of true free markets. That means no government interference in markets, no bailouts, no tax breaks, no regulations. You have no clue what libertarianism is.
What a fuckin' retard this guy is. The whole society today is an example of how libertarianism would work. Most of your salary you spend as you wish (at least if you're living in America). Most goods are at large made in a free marked situation. Libertarianism means you also allowed to spend the last 44% of your gross salary.
The bureaucrats and politicians who bribe those less fortunate, and use them as a weapon against the middle class and give the ill gotten gains to the bankers, and then use the threat of imprisonment to extort the money earned by the sweat of ones brow. And not wanting to be extorted is spoiled? try that in your private life. Involuntary servitude is immoral, and is slavery. There was no income tax before 1913, all income tax goes to interest on the debt to the private federal reserve ..
"They've never been out of the country or their tiny little suburb. They don't know what an actually oppressive government looks like. They've never lived during a depression. They never lived in a slum." I'm not sure what group/class/race of people you're stereotypically describing, but it is definitely not the universally applicable ideology of libertarianism and freedom.
what's wrong with libertarians? Simply, they advocate liberty. LOL! I think every American is a libertarian it's just the American public has different definitions of liberty.
I think areas where order has broken down is a good example of libertarian ideology at work. If you get rid of power from a sphere you don't get blissful anarchy. The Roman empire fell and warlords took over to become the monarchs of Europe. Create a power vacuum and the next greatest power moves in. If they don't like having the fed govt in charge, lets see how they like being governed by Monsanto or Halliburton. The face cares not whether the boot crushing it is privately owned.
Libertarians are NOT good at arguing. Terrible in fact. What they are good at is changing the topic, cherry picking, and insulting people. Anyone who dares disagree with the Holy Trinity of libertarian ideology (Rand, Friedman, Paul) can expect to be buried in a shocking dearth of knowledge and a deluge of sickening insults. I hate to generalize, but I've yet to find a counterexample, so if I were to merely accuse MOST libertarians of behaving that way, I wouldn't be honest.
libertarianism has failed every time it has been tried ....... vague allusion to South American libertarianism ....... libertarianism has never been tried, so it is untested.
So you are saying that the constitution is now not applicable because we are now living in an industrial military complex? Riiiiight. Oh and that you know better than the founding fathers? Recognising Africans as human beings is totally libertarian. All the do gooding liberal laws make race an issue again. Gingrich and Bush are damn nazis. Liberal social programs dont work and I'm from a poor area by the way.
@ILik3PH0T0, well you still have net neutrality in place which basically means that the government preserves equal access to the internet and prevents providers from giving favoritism to certain web sites. And yes, a lot of what we so cherish today such as cell phones were developed by the government for war and then for commercial purposes. The free market didn't event the internet, nor the cell phone yet, they made them better. The trick is measuring between a public and private involvement.
@testing88534 i dont know if you are on the internet very much, but do you know what SOPA is? where is your equal access now? oh and guess what else the government made for war, atomic bombs, toxic gases, etc! government should never interfere with the personal lives of the people it works for!
Lots of misconceptions about libertarians here. One thing I do want to touch on is when you say there are no examples of libertarian sucess in the world. Study the economic development in the early 1990's of a country that now has the nickname "Baltic Tiger".The 1st prime minister , who was responsible for setting up the country's economic engine read only one book on econonics and implemented many of ideas from that book. It was Milton Freedman's "Free to Choose".
I admire your enthusiasm, but I encourage you to delve more deeply into history and open your mind to honestly seeing all sides without resorting to hyperbole and over generalizations. Think things all of the way through. Ex: Your defense argument makes no sense. "The rich have more to defend"? Are you saying that a rich person's freedom and life are worth more than your own? That is what our defense is about...defending lives and freedom. How many BMWs are in the driveway are of no relevance.
Your point about Libertarians not having an example of a currently existing utopia is based on the assumption that all available forms of "utopia" ARE in existence. Except, they aren't.
Also, not sure what being a liberal, democrat, libertarian, republican, etc have to do with how effective they are at arguing. You classify a person's effectiveness in debate through his skill, not his beliefs. Well, most of the time, anyway. :P
Also, those kinds of things are ok on a state or local level. If California wants to tax business, let them. If Massachusetts wants universal health care, great. Each state, county or city can decide how they spend their own money.
Your Ben Franklin comment is typically uninformed. Franklin's friend, Dr. Bond approached him with the idea which Franklin liked. The assembly baulked at the idea so Franklin made an agreement that if he could raise half the money they would pay the other half. They agreed thinking he wouldn't be able to raise the funds.
So from about 1:30 to 2:15 he says Libertarian ideas were "kinda implemented" and a "complete failure" in South America and then says it's easy to argue for a Libertarian to argue because "their theories are completely untested." Don't get on this merry-go-round. It's not going anywhere.
So many errors - where to begin... The USA started as a utopian libertatian state, and was founded on Libertarian principles of limited government. Our current economic problems exist because of gov't interference in commerce - chiefly the negation of moral hazard. Europe is a liberal's paradise - or it was. Now we are watching as it is literally falling apart at the seams before our very eyes. A living example of the end-stage of socialist, wealth-redistributionist policies come to fruition.
Liberals would rather funnel taxpayer money through the government where it can be used to make poor economic decisions and pay their crony corporate friends.
@TheStrangerInTheRye — It's also full of unfounded assertions and generalizations. He also appears to be ignorant that the idea of progressive taxation (i.e., the rich should pay more because they earn/benefit more) comes straight out of the Communist Manifesto. (Yes, Marcus, I played the "communist" card with that statement, but it's a justified play because it's the truth. A little research on that score would prove beneficial, trust me.)
@TheStrangerInTheRye libertarianism is factless, abstract, theoretical theory that does not fit the present-day circumstances and practicalities and is thus unworkable. Like for historians, it is fallacious to start a works with the idea "this is what I think" and then pick and choose facts (fact-fillers) arbitrarily to fit your theory. It should rather be the other way around because there is more intellectual integrity.
Taxing the rich is not the answer. You trust government too much with your money. It'll just go to endeavors overseas, whether it be wars, UN, financial aid to other countries, military bases around the world and things you and I don't even know about. CERTAINLY would not come back to serve you somehow. lol
Also, I can't believe you go out of your way to say Libertarians never lived in a slum, or never been outside the country and that we were given fortunate circumstances in life and that's why it's easy for us to have these views. really? Do you REALLY believe that?
Well, we already have a socialist country throwing all its money at big useless government failures like FEMA, DHS and war on drugs. Social Security and Welfare taxation is not going to save you from the 6 trillion dollar debt your Obama just handed to your generation. Universal Health Care ain't free neither and there's not enough money in the world to pay for any of this. You should embrace some Libertarian ideas.
To amend the constitution to give rights to anyone is to directly acknowledge they had none and and if it weren't for the government, they wouldn't have any at all.
If you ask me, that hardly suggests they are humans. Rights are God-Given, not granted by the Government.
We didn't need to amend the constitution, we just had to apply it to them as well. Same with women.
Patriot act... NOT libertarian... tax loop holes... NOT libertarian... If you think the republicans are libertarians than you really really need to go back to the drawing board.
@RetroTheSkywalker Dems and libertarians agree on so many different things... so does that make libertarians dems? The truth is that libertarians don't fall into either political group. Right now Ron is running Republican because they are fiscally conservative (or say they are). Ron paul supports many things done by the demicratic party.
Libertarian Utopia = Somalia
RebelThoughts 5 days ago
Libertarians are clueless morons.
RebelThoughts 5 days ago
The notion that Libertarians were "completely against" black people having the same rights as whites is a lie. Next, you overcomplicate Libertarianism. It's not complicated. We want to live our lives and you to live your life and for govt to get involved only to settle legal disputes or when that nation is invaded. Libs and Cons both like using govt to effect social change, which we reject. It's funny to us when a Lib fails to realize how like a Con he is in that regard.
swebbie 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this insane babble rant , is just searing indictment of our education in the US.where all this kid is doing is putting fragmented bits of regurgitated socialists obambaphile propaganda.he offers no proof , tries to plagiarize and then pass it off as original though in a effort to "look educated" now throw in the narcissism of a closed mind & BOOM. we have this vid here.1 last thing kid .stay off the dope. take a page from your idiot " YES WE CAN"
SpartacusForFreedom 1 week ago
353 browshirt thugs think that Americans should be forced to become the Non-States of America.
shadownor 1 week ago
this insane babble rant , is just searing indictment of our education in the US.where all this kid is doing is putting fragmented bits of regurgitated socialists obambaphile propaganda.he offers no proof , tries to plagiarize and then pass it off as original though in a effort to "look educated" now throw in the narcissism of a closed mind & BOOM. we have this vid here.1 last thing kid .stay off the dope. take a page from your idiot " YES WE CAN"
SpartacusForFreedom 1 week ago
@SpartacusForFreedom dude...just stop lol you are making yourself look plain ridiculous. You just keep mouthing off in anger by taking it out on ppl who are actually educated. By the way, you cannot play the "education is taken over by liberals" card when since the 80s, there has been considerable influence by right wing think tanks, especially the Cato Institute
Radetzky19 1 week ago
Perhaps you should make an outline next time so you can collect your thoughts. It sounds more like rambling than explaining.
kippyafd 1 week ago
you were well actually you were doing less thinking...you were being more impulsive and just ranting rather than actually trying to figure out a soluble solution
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
3) because then you need to provide a standard on what incentives businesses have to regulate themselves and "do the right thing"; frankly, history shows they can be incapable of that, and unfortunately libertarians give more agency to "wishful thinking" of the abstract, rather than to interdisciplinary scholarship like history. It looks good on paper, but it really does not hold much weight to the practicalities of our time. Ppl are ppl, whether in gov't or in business, need to be accountable
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 4) actually, that standard I mentioned before that you need to provide, actually is a double standard and it is logically fallacious. You cannot demonize the government yet give businesses carte blanche because they are "moral".
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
2) Secondly, from what you said :"That is the cost of allowing them to regulate themselves". LOL REALLY?If it was not for government, child labor would have still been used for awhile, racial and disability discrimination would still be allowed for employers,etc.There needs to be a separate body that id not tied to the market to make sure these entities can be held accountable. You cannot use the single-villain concept by demonizing the government but yet hold the market to be divine, know why?
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
It's really funny and naive of libertarians to use the "single-villain" concept in which government is to blame for everything and it is inherently evil but yet businesses are all good and divine... -_-. Businesses can be just as corrupt (and I argue even more so) when you decide to give them the power because all that matters is profit; so businesses are perfectly fine with violating human rights and committing abuses...this is the world libertarians want to live in and it's quite scary
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 Haven't you ever heard Ron Paul talk about the negatives of corporatism? Please don't comment on stuff when you don't even know what you are talking about.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty I do know what I am talking about...first of all, if Ron Paul is advocating for a free market society, then he should not be looking to conduct regulation on corporations; he saying that he will is not only contradictory to libertarian theory but it is also a politically bankrupt statement. Paulbots for some reason think Paul is immune from corruption. Sorry, he can be bought out by the private sector like everyone else.
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 He is talking about the government being in bed with corporations. They need to be separate. Our government is accepting money and the corporations are given favors in return. Our tax dollars are used to bail out these failed companies.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 LOL, you didn't even look into the topic. You just posted a comment based on what you heard. You have no idea what you are talking about. When does he talk about regulating corporations? He doesn't, he talks about keeping the government out of it. The government is the reason for all the corruption. They bailed out these companies with our money. They pretend to regulate things when they really don't. They need to let the market work.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty No I do sir, have you read robert nozick's book? You know..the father of american libertarianism? Most likely you have not. "The government is the reason for all the corruption". Again, your "argument" is fallacious because there is evidence that although the government failed to take some steps to derail the crisis, corporations and financial institutions were the primary reason it happened...and you want to deregulate even more? lmao.
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty 2) government has been increasingly staying out of business since the 80s; just look into the history of deregulation...that is the reason the financial crisis happened, because businesses/corps/financial institutions are not being held accountable because all that matters to them is profit; there is no incentive for them to to conduct abuses. A world you paulbots want to live in would deregulate them more...to which I say GTFO.
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 there are no incentives for them to not conduct abuses*
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 The problem is that we don't allow them to fail. If they can't operate a business well enough to stay in business then they should be allowed to fail. That is the cost of allowing them to regulate themselves. The government needs to stop getting involved, stop doing favors for them, and most of all stop bailing them out.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty "The problem is that we don't allow them to fail". The real problem is that they are too big to fail, if we let them fail, the crisis would have been so much worse! Why are they too big to fail? DEREGULATION. The deregulation on businesses/financial institutions and the deregulation of campaign finance statutes that now allow any big business to buy out Congress...all because of your silly ideology that deregulation brings only prosperity.
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 The reason they got too big to fail is most likely bc they figured our government will bail them out. We have certainly set the standard now.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty "The reason they got too big to fail is most likely bc they figured government will bail them out". Which goes to show you that the private sector cannot be fit to regulate themselves exclusively. The government did their job to bail them out to prevent Americans from even worse suffering.
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 Ron Paul predicted that the housing collapse would come 5 years before it even happened. The government distorted the housing market with their policies. You can't argue against that.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty the FBI predicted it in 2004. Again, over the years, there have been ppl in government who saw it coming and tried to stop it by proposing regulations but of course this only sent the private sector into a hissyfit. There are some bad ppl in government but that does not make government as a whole bad.
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 But it was government policies that distorted the market in the first place.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty check out "inside job" by matt damon. That will solve a lot of discrepancies.
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 Oh yeah Matt Damon huh. Looks like a bunch of rich people trying to tell me about a catastrophe coming and they may not be able to afford their next payment on their yacht. That catastrophe has already hit the rest of us and it is going to get worse. All thanks to our crappy government policies that destroys business and distorts the market.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty lol that documentary was made in 2009 in response to the economic crisis and he does some really great interviewing calling people out. Your first sentence is pathetic. OK, when I say preventing a worse catastrophe, that was back in 2008!! There is nothing to argue dude, if the government did not bail out these entities we would have suffered alot more, get over it and move on. Again, the use of the single-villain concept is fallacious
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 I never said that businesses weren't corrupt. So not sure where you came up with this "single-villain concept". Like I said money and power lead to greed. The federal government is just as susceptible to the greed as anyone else. The only difference is that the government has the power to take money from me, lock me up, take away liberties. I don't want them taking my money and getting involved in business b/c then they will become just as corrupt.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty businesses can take away your liberties too and they have in the past. It is not about who is corrupt rather how to old various entities accountable
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 When will Americans get it? To put it simple I feel that to be afraid of a corporation or business is one thing but to be afraid of my own government is a whole other ball game that I don't want to ever experience. Our government has no business doing what they are doing.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty im halting the conversation at this point because your points are becoming to generalized and you are relying on metaphysics for your reasoning. Especially that last sentence; government has no business doing what? sorry, but that requires so much more dissection
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 So you ran out of talking points to spew at me. I only have limited room to post a comment. Do you really need me to explain to you what our government is doing right now? Um, I thought that was the topic we were discussing. You know things like bail outs.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty whatever dude, you just keep going in circles, it's a waste of my time; I cant deal with cognitive dissonance..yes I'm aware of the problems, I'm just not crazy and I actually use rationality and practicality, not simple ideology
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 Who was over thinking this again?
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 But thanks for not harassing me anymore. It is a simple difference of opinion. No reason to be mean to people.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 Businesses can not be allowed to believe that we will bail them out whenever they fail, they have to be allowed to fail.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty businesses are allowed to fail and we have seen it with companies like enron, the problem is this was a very special case...again, I do not understand why you cannot see that bailing out prevented an even bigger catastrophe...you are def overthinking.
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 How am I overthinking it? You are the one talking about catastrophe.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty I'm sorry but you cannot demonize the government from preventing a more catastrophic crisis. To do so, you have to really support that with overwhelming evidence because otherwise there is no credibility in it. I dont think you would be willing to suffer more.. I dont think anyone would..so that "argument" you have is pretty difficult to follow through
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 I can certainly demonize them for creating policies that were major contributing factors to causing the crises.
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
@2411Hellokitty sure but that doesnt mean you have to overthrow government. You also given the circumstances, must demonize the private sectors who took it upon themselves to be responsible for the crisis.
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
I'm still waiting for that "Great Society" FDR promised me LOL!
Joe11Blue 2 weeks ago
You make me sick. Learn what it means to have soul.
LXXITobinator 2 weeks ago
I am going to ask this question for starts to better understand this video so I am sure we are on the same page. What is the difference to you between a Libertarian and a Liberal? I really would not get the video if I dont hear your basis for this. Others wise I am going to have to assume what I think you mean and I do not want to be wrong on this.
Ryukikon 2 weeks ago
Libertarians believe in the Constitution. The Constitution of the United States is not ridiculous. But don't fret Libertarians b/c these videos are a good sign. People don't post these types of videos about a party that doesn't matter. Ron Paul 2012!!!!
2411Hellokitty 2 weeks ago
you claim the rich benefit more from the government defending their millionth dollar than their tenth
richard79930 3 weeks ago
my brothers name is Marcus Silva.
BATTLEFEELD3 3 weeks ago
I would argue with this guy, but looking at the dislike bar I dont have to
rodrigodet 3 weeks ago
There are so many comments in your video that are absent of any genuine thought or logic, it would take me far more space than is available here to refute and ridicule them; so let me just say the following which will satisfy as a be all end all response to your inanity: Human nature has not changed since the constitution was written, the environment in which it is implemented has. Hence the general guideline and theory planted by the founders apply today same as in the 1700'sYou whiney libtard.
DOnkDown 3 weeks ago 2
You seem angry... Want some weed? Makes you think straight.
bobdull420 3 weeks ago
we had a someone libertarian utopia in the early centuries of our country.
NecessariusVerum 4 weeks ago
our utopia the constitution moron , keep holding on to you revisionist jew boy views straight out of the commie manifesto huh comrade
all you did was twist facts to suit your weak theory in governing pff x100
what a idealist clown
SpartacusForFreedom 1 month ago
When someone contradicts themselves, that means there wrong, do you know what contradiction even means!
ILik3PH0T0 1 month ago
Fucking pussy. I don't need the government to take care of me, but I can see why cowardly faggots like you would.
ScrotyMcBoogerballz 1 month ago
@ScrotyMcBoogerballz Hence 80% of the fucking population.
ScrotyMcBoogerballz 1 month ago
Would you like the government to wipe your {stupid} ass as well?
ScrotyMcBoogerballz 1 month ago
Libertarianism is not about anecdontes or "gotcha" quotes, but this video and the article it refers to IS.
The more freedom to choose a society has in any particulr industry - the more prosperous is.
We don't read every day about a crisis in supermarkets, Walmart shops, cafes, pharmacies etc. These are industries that are RELATIVELY up to the free market.
Compare that to the housing market, the banks, FEMA etc - these are heavily regulated and controlled industries, that regularly break down.
LibertyDownUnder 1 month ago
In the end, yes, it was pretty sporadic. Also you addressed some issues with, what I honestly think is, pretty abhorrent ignorance. A lot of what you said was twisting words or changing themes and relating or correlating non-related entities.
Also, you wanna know why the GOP is endorsing libertarianism more? Because if they pandor to our lust for promises then we will support them. They want that 10% "independent" vote.
saifoda 1 month ago
if my history is correct, lincoln was a republican. and like milton friedman said, there would have been no laws governing blacks in the US if it was libertarian.
RESTxINxPIECEZ 1 month ago 4
your not talking about anarchism are you? i'm out of here
death9719 1 month ago
the dems have it right no here's why:
1. they want to extort money from the people (taxes)
2. they want to regulate the economy so corporations can ravage the world, regulation doesn't control big business, it prevents competition to big business, a free market is small/midsized businesses no corporation can exist in a free market
3. they want to keep a monopoly on services, that could be provided better by private enterprise
FREE MARKET ANTI-CAPITALISM FTW
death9719 1 month ago
First, liberals are not good at arguing. Second, libertarians have well formed arguments because they are right. This guy does not know what he is talking about at all. How can you say that a libertarian "utopia" will not work if it hasn't been implemented?
SuperWaterboy17 1 month ago
@SuperWaterboy17 libertarianism is factless, abstract, theoretical theory that does not fit the present-day circumstances and practicalities and is thus unworkable. Like for historians, it is fallacious to start a works with the idea "this is what I think" and then pick and choose facts (fact-fillers) arbitrarily to fit your theory.
Radetzky19 1 month ago
@Radetzky19 how can you say that libertarianism is fact-less when every argument that libertarians make is based off historical references that are fact. I would assume that your ideal society leans toward, socialism, maybe even communism, which has been PROVEN to fail. A free market society has never failed because a truly free market has never existed. What right do you have to take from one and give to another without both parties consent?
SuperWaterboy17 2 weeks ago
@SuperWaterboy17 "A free market society has never failed because a truly free market has never existed". You are falsely assuming that since it has not been tried, it must work. No sir, American libertarianism gives primary agency to the abstract, not history. I'm not even going to answer your last question because libertarians themselves coerce the masses to believe like them because that is the only way they can attain the system they want....talk about a contradiction
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Radetzky19 I didn't say, "because it has been tried, it is going to work." I said, "A free market society has never failed because a truly free market has never existed." I neither assumed that it would or would not work. I simply was stating the fact that you cannot say something doesn't work if it has been tried. That statement applies to many other aspects of life other than a free market society. Do I believe it will work? Yes I do. Does that mean that it will? No.
SuperWaterboy17 2 weeks ago
@SuperWaterboy17 Just like every other human being that tries to persuade another that what they believe is right, libertarians persuade non-libertarians that their belief is right. Tell me, what is the difference between a libertarian trying to persuade some to believe what they believe and you trying to persuade people that libertarians are wrong. UUUHHHHH Talk about a contradiction.
SuperWaterboy17 2 weeks ago
@SuperWaterboy17 because libertarian advocates complete liberty and non-coercion but you ironically coerce ppl to believe like you do;ppl have to succumb to your values...that's the difference. Libertarianism in and of itself is a contradiction...self-ownership as you see it is not self-evident thus not innate. Try using less metaphysical underpinnings for your theory.
Radetzky19 2 weeks ago
@Radetzky19 No sir, it is not a contradiction. You clearly don't know libertarianism as well as you think you do. Believing in libertarianism is to believe in individual freedom for all. To believe that people should not infringe on other peoples individual freedoms. Therefor anything less than a libertarian society is not a truly free society. You are arguing that being under a libertarian society forces people to believe only libertarianism, which it does not.
SuperWaterboy17 1 week ago
@SuperWaterboy17 People can still believe in socialism under a libertarian society but instituting socialism infringes on personal liberty so therefor it cannot be implemented into a society. Which leads me back to my question, What right do you have to take from one and give to another without both parties consent?
SuperWaterboy17 1 week ago
@SuperWaterboy17 Yes it does, if people do not want to conform to your political ideology you are still coercing them and violating their liberties to live in a system they want to live in.
Radetzky19 1 week ago
@Radetzky19 First, no one is forcing them to stay in the society, seems like a cop out but it is still a valid point. Second, you point you are making is essential that which would defend a murderer. i.e. a murderer had the freedom to kill someone and it infringes on his personal liberty to deny him that freedom. That is essentially what you are trying to say when you say that someone who believes in socialism has the right to take what doesn't belong to them.
SuperWaterboy17 1 week ago
@SuperWaterboy17 With your logic I can say this, first no one is forcing YOU to stay in the present society of the U.S., so why coerce everyone to conform to libertarian ideals?
the second point you made is just funny and horribly wrong, I'm def not debating with someone who knows logic.
Radetzky19 1 week ago
Comment removed
Radetzky19 1 week ago
@Radetzky19 ...with someone who knows no logic*
Radetzky19 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Last time i checked libertarians believed in natural market evolution by means of consumer selection. We're not the ones who believe in an all powerful all loving government that controls everything.
yelloyo 1 month ago
libertarians don't believe in utopia. we're not communists.
chadimus84 1 month ago
Trying to talk a liberal into liking libertarians is like trying to talk a gay person into hitting on a hot chick.
jjenson2006 1 month ago
please respond to my comments if you want to learn truth
pbmaster4 1 month ago
oh and liberals believe in entitlement. you sir are a moron
pbmaster4 1 month ago
you know nothing, do some freaking research. liberals believe in regulating everything cause people are stupid and can't do things themselves, and killing helpless feti. shut the heck up and get off youtube. p.s please get educated
pbmaster4 1 month ago
This is all irrelevant though because any real libertarian will tell you that taxes of all kinds should be eliminated because it is thievery and so no, we do not want the state to have it.
caulds989 1 month ago
marcus, I am a libertarian and have been to over 45 countries. My travels have confirmed, not denied, my beliefs about the evils of government. I guess I could be a single case, but most libertarians I know are quite well traveled, at least as much as the next guy. As far as a flat tax goes, the rich still pay more because a percentage is a percentage so if you make 30 grand or 300 grand, the guy making 300 grand will pay more than the 30 grand guy.
caulds989 1 month ago
There are excise taxes,state taxes, sales taxes, and tariffs. There are also bonds which you can buy and invest in your government if you trust it.
DLeech1989 1 month ago
America is a socialist nation. We have a federal income tax, which means the government owns your money and provides the conditions (exemptions) upon which you can keep some of it. Another point you're missing is that the founders were Libertarian, and for good reason. Someone explain to me how a small group of people can decide whats best for a nation, economically and socially. Go ahead and try. It doesn't make sense. Thats why the people should restrain the gvt, not the other way around.
DLeech1989 1 month ago
The difference between Libertarianism and socialism is this- Libertarians believe that rights are granted to each individual from a source that transcends government or a collective group, so long as no individual suppresses the rights of another, Socialists believe rights are granted to individuals through a collective majority (government.) The first tenet of socialism is the denial of private property, which means you can't own anything, even yourself. So what if the government is corrupt?
DLeech1989 1 month ago
There is something that you don't get. We don't like you or your government. Libertarians just want to be left alone. We hate politics. We hate government. We hate our money and property being stolen. We want you and your government and your programs to get out of our lives.
Vindigary 1 month ago
Please go read the Constitution to find out about real Libertarianism, since you apparently haven't a clue. Sorry. Didn''t make it through much of your incoherent diatribe. You have a gross misunderstanding of Libertarianism.
miazagora 1 month ago
This kid is totally clueless.
ym2413a 1 month ago
You say, "It's hard to read Libertarians without concluding that they've never been out of the country or even their tiny little suburb."
Erm, excuse me!? I was a military brat for the first 17 years of my life! I've lived in and/or visited 18 different countries on 3 different continents and 39 of the 50 states! And I'm Libertarian! I'm sure that others have visited or lived elsewhere, too. So, um, I'm sorry, Marcus, but you sound profoundly parochial in this video.
gdtownsend 1 month ago
Furthermore, having been a military brat, I have firsthand experience with socialized medicine. It's all that we had in the military. Think about that for a moment. But my experience with socialized medicine goes beyond the military, because when we lived in England, my mum's home country, we used the British National Health System.
One common statement aptly summarizes the military and socialized medicine: "Hurry up... and wait!" Because that's exactly what you'll be doing. A lot of waiting.
gdtownsend 1 month ago
You ask the question how will everything be paid for without an income tax? Before you ask such a question, you should research the answer to this question, "How did the U.S. pay for everything during the first 137 years of its history, when it had NO income tax?" Resorting to arguments that the times were different, the society was more agrarian, etc, ignores the fact that the truisms of sound economics remain constant regardless of the technological level of any epoch or country.
gdtownsend 1 month ago
I hope every person in the cult of Ron Paul dies...
bewilderedkettle 1 month ago
So your argument against Libertarianism is that it's never been implemented so it's never been tested? So why not let's try it?
SigSauer2281 1 month ago
There has never been a Libertarian Utopia because there has never been a Libertarian society.
SigSauer2281 1 month ago
Nearly ALL of this makes absolutely NO sense.
philthatremains 1 month ago
Were good at arguing because we are smart and have formed our opinions by becoming informed, however just keep making excuses and making false generalizations.
Trolling4RonPaul2012 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"I read points i found off bias internet websites after lots of searching for negative opinions. Then i go make vidoes on other peoples points like a parrot and try to "discuss" the issues in nothing but platitudes.. "
You will never understand the real issues until you learn to think for yourself. Surrounding yourself with other equally ignorant people who share your views does not mean you are right.
bIGbUTtHole420 1 month ago
Comment removed
bIGbUTtHole420 1 month ago
The Bill of Rights only applied to what Congress could do to the people, read Marbury v. Madison. And you bring up the FairTax. The FairTax applies to only new goods and services that are purchased, now tell me, who is more likely to purchase new goods and services? Libertarianism, especially in economics, is based around the idea of true free markets. That means no government interference in markets, no bailouts, no tax breaks, no regulations. You have no clue what libertarianism is.
macitymac1 1 month ago
kind of how like most socialist utopias have worked right?
macitymac1 1 month ago
What a fuckin' retard this guy is. The whole society today is an example of how libertarianism would work. Most of your salary you spend as you wish (at least if you're living in America). Most goods are at large made in a free marked situation. Libertarianism means you also allowed to spend the last 44% of your gross salary.
Idol2011no 1 month ago
This guy is such a closed-minded douche that that alone physically pains me to watch his flagrantly flawed videos.
bucknation2012 1 month ago
liberal argument: You are a racist. You are anti-environmental. You hate the poor.
xHippieHunter 1 month ago
The bureaucrats and politicians who bribe those less fortunate, and use them as a weapon against the middle class and give the ill gotten gains to the bankers, and then use the threat of imprisonment to extort the money earned by the sweat of ones brow. And not wanting to be extorted is spoiled? try that in your private life. Involuntary servitude is immoral, and is slavery. There was no income tax before 1913, all income tax goes to interest on the debt to the private federal reserve ..
14bigthor88 1 month ago
CLUELESS IDIOT!
14bigthor88 1 month ago
Wow, look at that dislike bar! I love how we libertarians rule the internet :)
hortulanus94 1 month ago
Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.” Benjamin Franklin
This country was based on ideas for liberty and if you think Republicans are the same as us then there is no help for you.
dog2547 1 month ago
This video should be titled "I like to herp derp with my camera on"
kd5eej 1 month ago
"They've never been out of the country or their tiny little suburb. They don't know what an actually oppressive government looks like. They've never lived during a depression. They never lived in a slum." I'm not sure what group/class/race of people you're stereotypically describing, but it is definitely not the universally applicable ideology of libertarianism and freedom.
Rickytheory 1 month ago
what's wrong with libertarians? Simply, they advocate liberty. LOL! I think every American is a libertarian it's just the American public has different definitions of liberty.
islamiscrap8888 1 month ago
Excellent video! What's wrong with Libertarians? A whole hell of alot!
Navywxman 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think areas where order has broken down is a good example of libertarian ideology at work. If you get rid of power from a sphere you don't get blissful anarchy. The Roman empire fell and warlords took over to become the monarchs of Europe. Create a power vacuum and the next greatest power moves in. If they don't like having the fed govt in charge, lets see how they like being governed by Monsanto or Halliburton. The face cares not whether the boot crushing it is privately owned.
devourerofbabies 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Libertarians are NOT good at arguing. Terrible in fact. What they are good at is changing the topic, cherry picking, and insulting people. Anyone who dares disagree with the Holy Trinity of libertarian ideology (Rand, Friedman, Paul) can expect to be buried in a shocking dearth of knowledge and a deluge of sickening insults. I hate to generalize, but I've yet to find a counterexample, so if I were to merely accuse MOST libertarians of behaving that way, I wouldn't be honest.
devourerofbabies 1 month ago
libertarianism has failed every time it has been tried ....... vague allusion to South American libertarianism ....... libertarianism has never been tried, so it is untested.
are you medically stupid?
haydenslaymaker 1 month ago
Holy fuck - Anarchist - Libertarian - Wanna-be-Libertarian - Authoritarian - Totalitarian - FUCK
There's the scale I came up with.
Amish234 1 month ago
Liberals? Arrogant? I wouldn't have guessed!
DJSpindoctor2010 1 month ago
If you're not a Libertarian, you're an Authoritarian
AGeekWithAShotgun 1 month ago
So you are saying that the constitution is now not applicable because we are now living in an industrial military complex? Riiiiight. Oh and that you know better than the founding fathers? Recognising Africans as human beings is totally libertarian. All the do gooding liberal laws make race an issue again. Gingrich and Bush are damn nazis. Liberal social programs dont work and I'm from a poor area by the way.
caisamadrid 2 months ago
you just don't get it.
franklcarleii 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How do the rich have "more to defend" than everybody else? Are their lives more important?
aerosmithfanatik 2 months ago
Comment removed
aerosmithfanatik 2 months ago
Example of libertarianism working? Try the internet.
tubo222555 2 months ago 14
@tubo222555 Could you please explain why the internet is an example of libertarianism working?
DodgeballGuy1 1 month ago
@tubo222555, well guess what....the internet was created by the government..dun dun duuun.
testing88534 1 month ago
@testing88534 yeah but not for the use that it is used today, they wanted it as a military advantage!!
ILik3PH0T0 1 month ago
@ILik3PH0T0, well you still have net neutrality in place which basically means that the government preserves equal access to the internet and prevents providers from giving favoritism to certain web sites. And yes, a lot of what we so cherish today such as cell phones were developed by the government for war and then for commercial purposes. The free market didn't event the internet, nor the cell phone yet, they made them better. The trick is measuring between a public and private involvement.
testing88534 1 month ago
@testing88534 i dont know if you are on the internet very much, but do you know what SOPA is? where is your equal access now? oh and guess what else the government made for war, atomic bombs, toxic gases, etc! government should never interfere with the personal lives of the people it works for!
Ron Paul 2012!
ILik3PH0T0 1 month ago
@tubo222555
Actually that's called Anarchy. At least where the 4chan roams.
bobdull420 3 weeks ago
ps being allowed to criticize the gov isn't libertarian?
you123123123123 2 months ago
I disagree with you, but you deserve a thumbs up for not disabling ratings.
you123123123123 2 months ago
Lots of misconceptions about libertarians here. One thing I do want to touch on is when you say there are no examples of libertarian sucess in the world. Study the economic development in the early 1990's of a country that now has the nickname "Baltic Tiger".The 1st prime minister , who was responsible for setting up the country's economic engine read only one book on econonics and implemented many of ideas from that book. It was Milton Freedman's "Free to Choose".
26whitesox 2 months ago
I admire your enthusiasm, but I encourage you to delve more deeply into history and open your mind to honestly seeing all sides without resorting to hyperbole and over generalizations. Think things all of the way through. Ex: Your defense argument makes no sense. "The rich have more to defend"? Are you saying that a rich person's freedom and life are worth more than your own? That is what our defense is about...defending lives and freedom. How many BMWs are in the driveway are of no relevance.
PleasantlyPeanut 2 months ago
Your point about Libertarians not having an example of a currently existing utopia is based on the assumption that all available forms of "utopia" ARE in existence. Except, they aren't.
Also, not sure what being a liberal, democrat, libertarian, republican, etc have to do with how effective they are at arguing. You classify a person's effectiveness in debate through his skill, not his beliefs. Well, most of the time, anyway. :P
JackSprattDaBat 2 months ago
Also, those kinds of things are ok on a state or local level. If California wants to tax business, let them. If Massachusetts wants universal health care, great. Each state, county or city can decide how they spend their own money.
66gtb 2 months ago
Your Ben Franklin comment is typically uninformed. Franklin's friend, Dr. Bond approached him with the idea which Franklin liked. The assembly baulked at the idea so Franklin made an agreement that if he could raise half the money they would pay the other half. They agreed thinking he wouldn't be able to raise the funds.
66gtb 2 months ago
Is the "untested libertarian system" that's easy to argue for similar to "stimulus will work, we just haven't pumped enough into the system?"
66gtb 2 months ago
So from about 1:30 to 2:15 he says Libertarian ideas were "kinda implemented" and a "complete failure" in South America and then says it's easy to argue for a Libertarian to argue because "their theories are completely untested." Don't get on this merry-go-round. It's not going anywhere.
66gtb 2 months ago
George Washington made it illegal to criticize the government! What! What! What! That was Madison you moron!
rehwr 2 months ago
So many errors - where to begin... The USA started as a utopian libertatian state, and was founded on Libertarian principles of limited government. Our current economic problems exist because of gov't interference in commerce - chiefly the negation of moral hazard. Europe is a liberal's paradise - or it was. Now we are watching as it is literally falling apart at the seams before our very eyes. A living example of the end-stage of socialist, wealth-redistributionist policies come to fruition.
madaxe606 2 months ago
Liberals would rather funnel taxpayer money through the government where it can be used to make poor economic decisions and pay their crony corporate friends.
kdaviper 2 months ago
This video is so full of non sequiturs it's ridiculous.
TheStrangerInTheRye 2 months ago 22
@TheStrangerInTheRye — It's also full of unfounded assertions and generalizations. He also appears to be ignorant that the idea of progressive taxation (i.e., the rich should pay more because they earn/benefit more) comes straight out of the Communist Manifesto. (Yes, Marcus, I played the "communist" card with that statement, but it's a justified play because it's the truth. A little research on that score would prove beneficial, trust me.)
gdtownsend 1 month ago
Comment removed
gdtownsend 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheStrangerInTheRye libertarianism is factless, abstract, theoretical theory that does not fit the present-day circumstances and practicalities and is thus unworkable. Like for historians, it is fallacious to start a works with the idea "this is what I think" and then pick and choose facts (fact-fillers) arbitrarily to fit your theory. It should rather be the other way around because there is more intellectual integrity.
Radetzky19 1 month ago
Taxing the rich is not the answer. You trust government too much with your money. It'll just go to endeavors overseas, whether it be wars, UN, financial aid to other countries, military bases around the world and things you and I don't even know about. CERTAINLY would not come back to serve you somehow. lol
MikesMethods 2 months ago
Also, I can't believe you go out of your way to say Libertarians never lived in a slum, or never been outside the country and that we were given fortunate circumstances in life and that's why it's easy for us to have these views. really? Do you REALLY believe that?
MikesMethods 2 months ago
Well, we already have a socialist country throwing all its money at big useless government failures like FEMA, DHS and war on drugs. Social Security and Welfare taxation is not going to save you from the 6 trillion dollar debt your Obama just handed to your generation. Universal Health Care ain't free neither and there's not enough money in the world to pay for any of this. You should embrace some Libertarian ideas.
MikesMethods 2 months ago
Example USA untill 1913
Alcan196 2 months ago
@Alcan196 hahahahaha you're dumb as fuck
EasyBedpost 2 months ago
@EasyBedpost how?
Alcan196 2 months ago
To amend the constitution to give rights to anyone is to directly acknowledge they had none and and if it weren't for the government, they wouldn't have any at all.
If you ask me, that hardly suggests they are humans. Rights are God-Given, not granted by the Government.
We didn't need to amend the constitution, we just had to apply it to them as well. Same with women.
THAT is Libertarian.
nosferotica1 2 months ago
@nosferotica1 i dont believe in god. umad?
EasyBedpost 2 months ago
@EasyBedpost
livid.
nosferotica1 2 months ago
What's wrong with your ugly face?
USTreasuryBond 2 months ago
@USTreasuryBond probably cuz he just smelled your mom's pussy.
EasyBedpost 2 months ago
Wow..... I haven't seen this much arrogance and complete ignorance in quite some time.
WestSkier11 2 months ago 2
@WestSkier11 that's because you live in your mom's basement and jerk off to ron paul's youtube vids.
EasyBedpost 2 months ago
I wish that teenagers this day had any clue...
arobidy 2 months ago
@arobidy No, you wish that teenagers had the same opinion as you.
Watchdawg 2 months ago
Patriot act... NOT libertarian... tax loop holes... NOT libertarian... If you think the republicans are libertarians than you really really need to go back to the drawing board.
pcgamernum1 2 months ago 29
@pcgamernum1 Republicans and Libertarians agree on so many different things...
RetroTheSkywalker 2 months ago
@RetroTheSkywalker Dems and libertarians agree on so many different things... so does that make libertarians dems? The truth is that libertarians don't fall into either political group. Right now Ron is running Republican because they are fiscally conservative (or say they are). Ron paul supports many things done by the demicratic party.
pcgamernum1 2 months ago